Abstract
The cheap conductivity‐based sensors favoured by farmers for soil moisture monitoring remain largely ignored by researchers because of their low accuracy, which results in high uncertainty regarding their utility for irrigators. In this work, conductivity measurements were compared with dielectric permittivity measurements in moisture ranges relevant to different applications. The results showed that the permittivity measurements captured moisture variability well ( R 2 > 0.8) throughout the full range tested (0%–35%), which is consistent with the literature. Conductivity measurements consistently distinguished dry from wet conditions ( p R 2 > 0.5) but not in higher ranges (>20%). This is problematic because important monitoring thresholds such as field capacity and saturation are in the upper moisture ranges. Conductivity measurements were found to lack any meaningful utility in most applications except those relevant to distinguishing dry from wet conditions and indicating lower‐range moisture patterns, such as monitoring in arid environments. This gives some merit to conductivity sensors considering their very low cost if corrosion is minimised. The described evaluation approach is suggested as an example for developers, labs and extension services to better communicate potential sensor utilities and restrictions to practitioners to improve their accessibility to decision support technologies.